My unpopular opinion is that dismissing negative opinions as unnecessary, harmful or less morally adequate than positive opinions is not only deplorable and anti-intellectual, but extremely dangerous too.
I... have not seen reason to pay that much attention to the ranking system in any of these games. Getting a good rank is an end goal. What matters more is the actual gameplay involved and the actual challenges in the level design you face. And so far, I don't really think I'd agree that i've seen anything from Unleashed that actually trumps Generations in those areas. Meanwhile, I don't pay attention to the ranking system at all in Generations, and play much better than that requires. While you don't need to maintain your flow and take all the right paths for the a rank, you can do that and it proviodes m0ore intrincis satisfcation tahn anything I have seen., Ah shoot. About the do or die stuff, I really hope that's not what we're talking about when we say Unleashed is more challenging. I always take special care to point out the difference between challenging and punishing. Challenging being what you have to actually do and punishing being the consequences for failing to do it. And that in mind, Generations has the same thing. About going as fast as possible in that game and not missing paths and ahving to backtrack or just missing them entirely, some of that stuff is absolutely about memorization if you can't predict it. It's the same thing as Unleashed. The only difference is while in Generations the consequence is falling on a slower path, in Unleashed AT TIMES it just kills you. But for me, it's basically the same thing. Because I am going to restart the level from the beginning in either case.
I sure hope Ben Hurst takes my criticisms of SatAM on this niche Sonic fansite to heart for the next season. (I hate the whole thing and think it should be Sonic Underground instead)
We all like Sonic, but it's more interesting to discuss the negative aspects of a game than to constantly suck its dick
Shit if I know if this is even on-topic, but in regards to Sonic Team? Honestly I'm putting all my bets on Sonic x Shadow Generations being the determing factor for what Sonic will be in the future / near future. When it comes down to it, I can give you reasons for why Sonic hasn't been on-par with other series. Frontiers? That was making the most out of nothing (Forces-tier Budget and Team Size), Superstars? (The last Sonic game made before SEGA's grandiose business plan regarding Expanding Sonic and pre-SEGA Super Games), and Dream Team...well actually people like that one. What I'm trying to say is that those two games come with a logic of why they ended up as-is. But Sonic x Shadow Generations is the first Sonic game that's being made AFTER Sega's supposed expansion and bloom. With that, I can say so far that it's not looking like they were full of shit this time. From a general audience standpoint, the remaster is tiers above every other Sonic remaster and Shadow Generations looks promisng. From a reviewer /critics standpoint, the remaster is fine while the Shadow Generations segment is looking promising or "cautiously optimistic". And outside of internal Sonic discussion, this is just looking good. Even in internal Sonic discussion, it's been so far more good than bad. It's nowhere near the fallout that early-Frontiers had. Or Frontiers period for that matter. ... What I'm trying to get at is that Sonic has sucked, lucked, and fucked up in that order for years. Some people get luck, some people feel fucked, but in the end it's still here and it's clearly beyond dying when there are series with better consistency that have been shotgunned to death by their own companies' horrible mismanagement or simply in the closet until the next decade at best (Mega Man) So when it comes down to it, I'm willing to bet that if Sonic x Shadow Generations gets an overall higher rating than Generations (Base) or simply put an 8/10 or higher. That's what I would consider promising for whatever comes next? Why do I say that? Because if a Remaster + Expansion with an obvioussly lower budget than whatever next 3D Sonic game can rock the shit out of the collective audience and reviewers, then I'm not as worried as I would've been going simply from Frontiers into Frontiers 2: We Have Money Now ... When it comes down to it, the past can't fixed. You can't fix Forces, Lost World, or the shortcomings in Frontiers or Superstars...but you sure as hell can get your shit together, and if that's what happens. Then hey, you can't fix your fuck-ups but sure can move on from them if you just keep doing right. If that happens, well guess I'll hate the past but be fine with the future? Look will this work, will this fail...will I keep rambling? Shit if I know what'll happen, see you all when the next gameplay footage comes out (Who knows, maybe we'll see more in tomorrow's Shadow Prequel Animation preview)
I feel like people complain so much about sonic here because 1) this is the unpopular opinions thread so people are naturally going to be contrarian, and 2) sega is way more reactive to fan response than pretty much any other major developer so everyone wants to get their 2 cents in. But I really hope SxS is as good as it seems to be. I'm actually kinda optimistic about it, it seems to be doing a lot of cool and weird stuff that I've been hoping the series would. I honestly wouldn't mind some more remakes in the same style (if it's good).
It would be hilarious (and its looking extremely likely) if SxS ended up being the highest rated 3D Sonic since Sonic Generations. But yea if SxS ends up being really good with no big "its good but—" flaws then the future of the games is genuinely looking extremely positive ...Unless we get a repeat of the early 2010s and Sonic Team just falls back on their old bs again after dropping a few good games
Can't wait for Lost World x Shadow in a few years. Finally we can see his side of the conflict against the Deadly Six...
No you don't get it, when shadow kills the secret seventh zeti Zeebo and Zavok comes forward about his opiate addiction, it will totally change how you see the Deadly Six.
If you read my post, you'll notice that i never disagreed with either of these. Theyre true, but at the same time constantly engaging in negativity all day rather than partaking in things that make you happy is not good for one's mental health. These things can coexist! Healthy criticism is good but you shouldn't let it define your entire personality.
You have no clue if it defines my entire personality though. You just saw a couple of negative posts and saw fit to complain about it them which is a form of negativity in itself. If you or anyone else want's to talk about something else you're free to.
I remember when I was dogpiled here for posting news of players' increasingly negative impressions of Frontiers before its release because I was being "overly negative" and "trying to discredit the game". And then when the game came out, my concerns turned out to be 100% correct and that it wasn't some grand conspiracy of "showing an old build" or "recording issues". This constant overreaction to any negative criticism as being "constantly negative" and "being your entire personality" is like the Sonic fandom equivalent of gang stalking. You're perceiving some kind of persecution and toxicity that just isn't there. I'm sorry, but talking about something positive just isn't as interesting in terms of discussion. When people discuss topics in a forum like this, there typically has to be some kind of conflict involved to generate something interesting. It engages your brain into coming up with solutions and alternative ideas. It motivates and inspires a call to action. This isn't a water cooler, where negativity will get you weird looks.
... I'm sorry, you're complaining that people are saying you're overly negative only to follow up with an argument that discussing something positive "isn't as interesting"? You realize that comes across as affirming those complaints. I can be negative at the water cooler with my coworkers about the weather or dumb customers or shit that happened to me, that's whatever bacause they'll whine to me about shit that bugs them too. If I were whining all the time they would just think I'm miserable to be around and avoid talking to me. That's not weird. Lots of online fanbases do the toxic positivity thing, I'll give you that, but that's in part why I stop engaging with any discussion on Sonic Retro that I can only say negative things about, at a certain point there's not much left to say and you just end up talking in circles with people.
See, that right there. Who here is "whining"? Me? I haven't posted anything for several pages, and the last thing I said was agreeing with other people that Sonic Team lacks talent. Wraith? Their posts about problems with Sonic are pretty far away from "whining". Technically Inept? In the Unpopular Opinions Thread, most people are going to have a negative opinion about aspects of Sonic other people love and then give reasons why. They're not going to talk about how much they love Sonic Unleashed, because...that's not an unpopular opinion. It's clear that plenty of fans love Unleashed. The problem here is that the perception of literally any negativity in the fanbase is somehow equated to the same kind of "media bias" hate mob against Sonic they perceive with big news outlets like IGN and popular Youtubers. And it's not like I never say anything positive, but the point is it's hard to discuss something positive unless there's some kind of conflict or disagreement. It would go nowhere. It's just: "I like this thing and here's why" "Oh cool, I agree" That's it. Again, that's fine if you're shooting the shit with some friends, but that's not this environment. If someone disagrees and says they don't like this thing, or they perceive a problem, then everyone's going to have an opinion about that to share with one another and voila, you now have a discussion.
The flowchart goes like this -someone posts critique -instead of refuting the critique, some attack on the concept of negativity is made, framing it as morally fraught somehow. -critiquer doubles down, not only defending their point but explaining why its actually fine to criticize, a concept no other in depth discussion of any media struggles with except for maybe fans of popular kids films. -"Oh now you're just stewing in it! What a bore/downer!" whole time, no point made against the is actually addressed. It's just whining about the concept of critique through increasingly split hairs. The beautiful thing about this board is that if you have a problem with someone's "personality" you can just block them and never have to hear from them again. This isn't actually a watercooler. You are not stuck with me. You are in control of your own destiny. If you don't like my posts, block me! I'm not going to change my tone or put less thought into my posts just because it hurts some people's feelings.
Well in this hypothetical situation I was referring to myself, so no. Discussion doesn't have to be that shallow. Hell, it usually isn't because it's a forum, there's no need to spam threads with "agreed" when there are other places to do so and I can't say I've seen much of it here. Either way that kind of shallow discussion isn't even confined to positive discussions, see the arguing in circles argument I brought up before.
